From: Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>
Date: 2005-05-20T00:36:12+09:00
Subject: Re: syntax sugar: treating an object like a method

Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@yahoo.com> writes:

> And one more thing.  If someone has both a local variable f and
> a method f, we have different behavior in 1.8.2 vs. 1.9:
>
> f = lambda {|*args|puts("lambda",*args)}
> def f(*args);puts("method",*args);end
> f(1,2,3)
>
> 1.8.2 calls the method and 1.9 calls the lambda.  This seems
> bad.  So it looks like the priority between local variables and
> methods has been reversed - 1.8.2 prefers methods and 1.9
> prefers local variables.  You can no longer use "()" to
> distinguish the two.  Maybe is does make sense because they are
> in the same namespace and local usually overrides, but people
> need to be aware.

Wasn't that just what you wanted?
Remember that Ruby 1.8 cannot call lambdas directly.

If one decides to call #call magically (which I'm quite opposed to),
local variables should have preferrence, I think.

Finally, () only defines evaluation order/parameters, there is no way
(and there shouldn't be, IMO) a method will behave differently when
called with or without parentheses.

-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen@gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org